Let down and disappointed about the contest…

Wait!  It’s not me.  And it’s got nothing to do with Orbit Trap this time either.

Curious who could be having seconds thoughts about the glorious Benoit Mandelbrot Fractal Art Contest 2009 besides Orbit Trap?  Well, it’s none other than Mr. Velocipede!

Here’s what she says:

I’ve finally had a chance to take a better look at the contest, and I find that I’m left feeling a little bit let down or disappointed. Not with any individual image, necessarily (although as several people have pointed out, a couple of them aren’t even really fractal), but that this year’s selections seem to be heavily weighted toward texture-fields and minimalism.

Heavily weighted?  Actually, as we all know from the deluge of information on how the judging works (I’m being sarcastic) that the winners are whatever the judges, together, decided to chose.  And this is the first year that any of the judges have actually spoken about their selections vis a vis what they personally chose that the whole panel didn’t select.  Mark Townsend, on the UF list mentioned a few of the submissions that he thought were quite good but which didn’t get enough votes to be one of the final 25 winners.  Samuel Monnier, a former BMFAC judge also commented on what he personally thought were good images in the contest which didn’t make the final cut either.

True to her name, Velocipede moves on quickly.

…to All-out Fractal Contest Public Insurrection!  Here’s how our fractal Che Guevarra ignites the masses:

It’s all gotten me started thinking about the strengths and weaknesses of fractals as a medium, and why I like them, which seems to be maybe different than why other people like them, and what the implications are for my own future work and the fractal-art world in general. It’s too much for me to process! And it’s all mixed up with a book I’m reading lately, written in the early 1920s and intended to explain why Modernism was (a) degenerate & evil and (b) doomed to be quickly forgotten. There seem to be some possible historical parallels, but I suspect it’s going to take me some time to sort them out.

Still, it does reinforce my idea that it would be really good if there were more fractal events than just this occasional big contest. I’m beginning to wonder if I might be able to organize some kind of small-scale thing. It’s an intimidating thought.

Sorry, excuse me.  I just have to laugh now. (cough! choke! sputter!)

Sounds like she’s arguing for a wider range of criticism and opinion and not just a single fleeting and transitory annual event.  Would a blog do the trick?  Like Orbit Trap, or probably something much less destructive to the fractal art community.  But don’t you laugh; a fellow revolutionary has already heeded the call.

“I pretty much agree with you. And I support your idea of organizing some small-scale thing :-)”

Orbit Trap has criticized the large image size requirements of the BMFAC.  We thought it would prevent smaller and non-UF works from being included as well as simply being a pointless restriction.  Velocipede adds something new to this and has a very sound art-based argument for it, too.

With the more minimal ones, I mostly just wonder what advantage there is in printing them very large, since there’s not particularly any new detail to be revealed. Graphically, they will no doubt be quite effective, but they seem to ignore the specific potential of fractals to be full of interesting surprises when magnified.

Anyhow, check out the three texture field images she’s referring to, as well as the four minimal images she suggests which don’t need such a large canvas size due to their lack of detail.  You have to click on each-word-in-the-phrase which she has linked.  That’s cute.  I’ve never seen anyone else do that.  I thought it was a mistake at first.

Technorati Tags:

Art, Craft and Fractals: Part 2

I got a couple of comments to my previous post, Art, Craft and Fractals, which raised an issue which I think needs to be clarified.  The term, Craft, is used in many ways and most of them are probably derogatory in the context of art.  But it’s not my intention to bad-mouth craft, only to show it for what it is and what it is not.

Craft is not immature art or the product of an art form in its early stages of evolutionary development: Craft is imagery that’s fun to look at.  Craft is not imagery that’s thought provoking or which expresses ideas or feelings.  Fractal Craft is simply fractals for the sake of fractals.  It’s people who love fractal imagery cooking up and mixing together new recipes of fractals that scratch our itchy eyeballs –itching for cool, new, exotic fractals.

This sort of thing doesn’t lead to art or create the foundation for a bold new skyscraper of art to be built upon.  It creates delicious taste sensations set out for our consumption and gobbled up before they have time to cool off.  It’s visual hedonism: pleasing, pleasant and pacifying.  Craft doesn’t upset people because it’s silent and anonymous like a decoration or ornamental table leg.  Craft doesn’t express opinions or even suggest opinions or anything complicated like that.  Craft is simply what it looks like: ornamental.

Fractal art might be young as an art form (although I don’t think it is) but that’s different than being juvenile.  Fractal art is the domain of craft because that’s what its practitioners pursue and set out to create.  It’s the intent of fractal artists to produce slick, multi-layered, eye-popping work.  I really have no problem with that because I see craft as a normal pursuit and a perfectly healthy one.  I have a problem with people trying to pawn off their craft as art, but that’s just my own critical disposition.  I like craft, but I like art more.  I’d like to see more art made, but if there’s more craft made as well, who cares?  Who cares? is the long term response to craft anyhow.  It has a fleeting glory and only briefly holds its audience’s attention.  Craft doesn’t enter our long term memory, but exists and is replaced by another shiny icon.

My definition of art and by consequence, craft, is functional.  Craft performs a singular function: ornamentation.  Specifically, in the context of fractals, craft is work that performs that function.  It’s not a matter of what people say it is, it’s a matter of what the experience the viewer has.  If you, the viewer, find some of the works in the BMFAC to be thought provoking or expressive in mood, emotion, idea, whatever, then it’s just as valid for you to defend them as art as it is for me to classify them as craft, according to my functional definition.

I don’t know, is this functional approach new and different?  The obvious corollary is that art is subjective since it may function differently for different people.

Another thing, craft isn’t junk.  I used an illustration of rather “domestic” hand made Christmas ornaments as a somewhat flavorful example of craft, but probably every winning entry in the BMFAC was rather skillfully made and represents artists at the top of the fractal art world.  Perhaps people assume that craft is junk is because in an art context, as I mentioned at the beginning of this post, craft is used as a label for amateur, cheesy, folksy, primitive, cliche kind of work.  But for me craft is used purely to denote a type of function the work performs and particularly in the fractal art world, craft is often professional, tasteful, complex and utilizing the latest, cutting-edge techniques.  That’s why artists consider it to be a real feather in their cap when they win something like the BMFAC or the (now defunct) Fractal Universe Calendar contest.  Their peers are saying they make good stuff –like their peers do.

I would prefer to make art instead though.  I don’t get as big a Wow! out of just looking at fractals as I did when I first discovered them.  I’m looking for something that’s different and appeals a wider area of my brain than simply that sugar cubed sized lump that neuro-scientists refer to as the fractal sugar center.  Why any of you professional craftspeople care what I think is odd, really.  Am I not a loser in your opinion?  I make junk, I like junk, and I write junk.  I don’t see what we have in common.

The whole art and craft “dichotomy” just explains what it’s all about perfectly.  Two different types of people whose different intentions lead to artwork that performs different functions.  One doesn’t grow or mature into the other; fractal craft has already grown up, blossomed and gone to seed.  Fractals, the medium, is what we have in common.  Not art.

Art, Craft and Fractals

Art is a term that is used very loosely these days.  I happen to think that this casual application of the label, “art” to everything graphical has produced some confusion in the digital art world and obscured what has traditionally been known as Fine Art, submerging it beneath a flood of what I think is best described as Craft.

So, under the general label entitled, “Art”, I separate out two categories of graphical works: art, and craft.  There’s nothing new to such a division and we’ve probably all heard these terms before, but I’ve resurrected this old-fashioned and contentious division because I think it’s fundamental to understanding any art form, but especially any of our 21st century computerized art forms such as fractal art.  I would say that you can not begin to understand fractal art and the people who are involved in it unless you fully comprehend the difference between art and craft as well as the corresponding differences between artists and craftsman.  Art and craft are very different things and find their origins in their differing, and sometimes conflicting, outlooks on Art itself.  I would say that every art form, not just fractal art, possesses a deceptive appearance of unity and commonality among its practitioners because they all share an interest in a common medium.  The common “medium” in fractal art being fractal imagery.  However, if one takes a closer examination of the actual artwork being produced under what appears to be the common banner of “fractal art” there will appear, as will appear in every art form I believe, two very distinct and independent activities going on under that common label of the art form and it’s medium; that being the pursuit of craft and also the pursuit of art.

Art and Craft Defined
Perhaps not the customary dictionary type of definition, but I prefer more practical definitions to the stiff, technical ones.  Craft is visually exciting graphical work.  Art, on the other hand is all about expression.  Craft is “cool graphics” and “awesome 3D rendering”.  Craft has immediate appeal and makes a good impression with a wide audience.  Art is thought provoking and oriented around ideas and triggers some deeper experience in the mind of the audience.  Art is sometimes hard to understand or relate to at first, and subsequent to this, the audience’s impression is more unpredictable and contingent on their intellectual connection with what the work is about or expresses.  All those factors work, ironically, both to increase the impact of art on its audience and also to limit the size of that audience.  Craft is nice to look at; richly ornamental; variations on a common theme or style.  Art is sometimes unpleasant to look at; suggestive of some idea or feeling; difficult to compare.

Similarly, craftsmen pursue common themes and styles and focus on the visual novelty of their art form while artists share little interest with each other in terms of the techniques and methods of their medium, as the focus of their work is what it says or the thoughts it provokes and for that reason the medium is merely a tool for expressing these things just as pen and paper are tools for writers to express themselves and not issues of great importance.  For artists, the medium is secondary; for craftsmen the medium is primary and their only interest.


Image by divadea

Why Art and Craft are so different
The reasons for these differences between craft and art come from their differing levels of complexity and intellectual involvement.  While it’s easy to say that craft is simple and decorative and art is complex and intellectual, I believe the difference is more accurately described from what attracts my attention when I’m looking at these two categories of art.  Craft attracts my visual interest in the medium, while art attracts my interest to what the medium is being used to express or convey.  Craft is rooted in the medium itself, while art is rooted in the use of the medium to present some mentally engaging experience.

And it’s all about experience, essentially.  Someone once defined art as an experience.  I think this perspective is much better because it zeros in on the common factor in all art –the viewer’s mind.  In this way, craft is a comforting and soothing experience which comes from looking at things which are pleasing to the eye.  Art is a much more varied experience and sometimes the complete opposite of that triggered by craft.  Art is sometimes unpleasant to look at and provokes feelings of disgust and fear.  Who wants to make or look at art like that?  Yes, good question.  I think you’re beginning to see how important –and divisive– the categories of art and craft really are.

Craft is the novelty of a medium
And Art is the novelty of the ideas expressed with the medium. The ramifications of all this for fractal art are enormous.  But then, they’re enormous for every art form.  Every art form has its artists and its craftsmen; every art form has its art and its craft.  Take portrait painting for instance: the Mona Lisa can be described as art because the expression on the subject’s face evokes strange and mysterious interpretations and corresponding thoughts –mentally engaging imagery.  The average portrait painted in oil paints is purely descriptive of the subject and while it may be quite life-like and have required a good deal of skill to produce, it’s really nothing more than a photograph rendered in a very expensive medium by hand.  What excites one about such a portrait is the medium; it’s a portrait “in oils”.  People are impressed with a life-like rendering of someone they know in oil paints because it’s hard to make or because it looks expensive.  It’s the craft they’re interested in, the oil paint medium.  But the Mona Lisa is admired today not because it’s a nice portrait, but because because it’s art.


Gare Montparnasse (The Melancholy of Departure), by Giorgio de Chirico, 1914

Woe to you! Makers of Craft…
In the fractal art world today, most artwork is really the sort of thing I’m describing as craft.  It’s exciting to look at and appeals to most people who see it, but it’s purely one-dimensional and attracts the attention of people who are merely looking for rich, ornamental work that is comforting to the eye.  From an art perspective such work is an empty experience and trivial.  In fact, zooming around in a simple, single-layer fractal program is probably more of an art experience than looking at the latest crop of winners from the BMFAC, the fractal art world’s annual craft show.

While the Ultra Fractal Guild may not incorporate all the high school kids from Renderosity and Deviant Art, it by far encompasses the greater majority of fractal artists today and these people are strictly pursuing the creation of craft, not art.  This is not to say they’re making bad fractal art.  Craft is not bad art; craft is merely flat, one-dimensional, “awesome” art.  The UFG is almost exclusively making works that are purely ornamental, pretty pictures, as someone said, and not work that is thought-provoking or expressive, the attributes by which real art has traditionally been defined.  It’s art, not craft, and they’re craftsmen, not artists because their work is limited to just displaying the cool graphics of the medium and doesn’t use the medium to express anything more intelligent than the latest 3D technique or layering trick.

But fractal art isn’t like those other art forms, is it?
It’s not because fractals aren’t capable of the realistic or figurative imagery that painting, drawing and sculpture have traditionally employed via creative human hands that fractal art today is largely composed of craft and lacking in art.  Abstract art lacks realistic and figurative imagery and yet is still capable of expressing moods, thoughts and ideas, albeit of a much more generic, abstract sort.  And fractals are just like photography in the sense that one captures rather than creates the imagery they use.  If abstract imagery and photography can produce real art and not exclusively craft, then there’s no reason fractals can’t be used to make art because fractals are essentially abstract photography.  Fractals have the potential to be more than just pretty pictures that are sold as decorations at craft shows; they can be art too.

The notion that fractals are not art, or incapable of being art, and are exclusively the domain of craft, is merely the by-product of the current fractal art scene’s own narrow interest in pretty pictures as well as it’s popular annual events like the Fractal Universe Calendar and the Benoit Mandelbrot Fractal Art Contest.  More than anything else, those two public events have spread the popular impression that fractal art is exclusively the preserve of the rich, ornamental craftwork they regularly present, applaud and award.  But it’s to be expected that when craftsmen get together to create a contest that they will end up producing an exhibition of craft and not art.  Art is not their pursuit or their interest –craft is.

When will the revolution come?
I don’t expect to see much change anytime soon.  Most fractal “artists” are dedicated craftspeople because that’s their thing.  They’re never going to make real art because they have no urge to do so.  Some of them are extremely good at what they do and I’m sure we’ll see the results of more newly discovered techniques and methods each and every year displayed at the BMFAC craft show.  The Ultra Fractal Guild is all about craft and art is something they’re heading away from, not heading towards or traveling parallel to.  Which is why I said that the sloppy way we use the term, Art, today obscures the divisions in an art form like fractal art and deceives one into thinking that fractal art is one single thing when in fact it’s two things: the traditional pursuit of art; and the much more popular pursuit of producing craft.  Real art has barely begun to be made in the fractal world because there are very few artists.  There’s plenty of craftsmen working away in their fractal woodworking shops and producing “cool graphics” and “awesome 3D effects” but that’s not art.  It’s great craftsmanship and very popular and probably sells well too, but in the long run such works become trivial and insignificant because they lack the substance that real artwork has.

Do I expect this to have much influence on the fractal art world?  Not likely.  But again, that’s to be expected because most of them are crafters and they’re immune and indifferent to issues relating to art.  But for me this idea of art vs. craft is cataclysmic; breaking the continent of fractal art in two and revealing two unconnected domains from what was previously assumed to be one.  And the art domain is by far the larger one in terms of creative potential and significance, although it is relatively unpopulated in comparison to the much more popular and populous, craft domain.  Craft, as in all art forms whether it be painting, drawing, sculpture or photography, is always the more common type of work because it’s merely variations on a theme.  But art revolves around creative thinking and expression, and that’s always a scarce resource.  No finer example of this exists than the fractal art world today.

Technorati Tags:

Scams and Viruses

Have we got a deal not for you…

Photograph: The Scam Truck by jepoirrier

I know how exciting it is when someone contacts you and wants to purchase your work. Who among us doesn’t want to be discovered and sell or display our art?  Just make sure those who come knocking have good intentions.

In the past week, I had two such inquiries — both worded in a similar manner.  You’ve already guessed where this is going.  Both offers were scams.

I knew both emails were from con artists because I received a nearly interchangeable come-on last year.

The most recent email was from “Lewis Martins” at a generic sounding gmail address.  The subject line was “am interested in your work……….”  Here is the email text:

Hello,
Top of the day to you .. i would like to know more details and descriptions of your artwork after checking out your profile on [Name of Art Site] but i was unable to get a name and details of the art as i am higly intrested and would like to buy as a birthday present for my wife. Kindly get back to me with info on how to get you the name of the artwork in order for you to get me details as well as final asking price of the artwork.i would await your response as soon as possible……

Several things ought to be fishy immediately.  The grammatical and spelling errors do not necessarily mean the inquiry is not from a cultured art curator, but the mistakes don’t give me confidence either.  There is a noticeable lack of specifics about the message — no mention of my name or the title of a specific art work, information that any semi-professional art site will surely have, and zero data on Mr. Martins.

Here are other common templates for similar art scam letters.  See why I instantly got bad vibes?

If I had responded to Mr. Martins in the hopes that he would purchase work from me, here is what would have happened.  Any of these circumstances should make you gun shy about further pursuing a sale.

1) Mr. Martins will be in a big hurry to complete the transaction — now — or, better yet, yesterday.  He can’t wait.  His wife’s birthday is looming. Your work is the perfect gift and he needs it immediately.  If you explain reasonable delays like taking days to make a print and taking longer to get that print shipped, Mr. Martins will be unable to tolerate the hold up.  His wife’s present can’t be postponed; he’ll have to look elsewhere if you drag your feet.  But the reason he is rushing you is because he wants to pay by

2) Writing you a check — which he hopes will not have time to clear (which it won’t) before you fall victim to the scam.  Which might be to send him art work, but, more likely, he’s after your money.  He’ll tell you there’s no need to ship the work — he’ll make the arrangements or have someone pick it up (and thus need your home address).  Or, and this should raise major red flags, he’ll concoct some convoluted reason to write you a check over the amount of your asking price — thus setting you up to pay him back the difference.  Since his check will bounce, you’ll be out any overage you agree to return.

What to do?  Don’t be in a hurry.  And don’t take checks.  Cashier checks are especially easy to forge.  Set up a PayPal account instead (and be aware that these can be prone to phishing schemes).  Insist the buyer use a credit card to purchase your art.  True, credit cards can be stolen, but at least the scam artists will be easier to track.  If you do decide to take checks (certified checks or postal money orders included), be aware that checks can sometimes take up to a month to clear.  Never send out any work until you are absolutely certain the check is legitimate and has been fully processed through your bank.

Be skeptical of anyone inquiring about your art that, for whatever reason, needs personal information about you — like street addresses or (shudder) a bank account or Social Security number.  Scrutinize carefully agents who love your work (for a fee) or galleries that want to represent you (for a fee).  Insist on written contracts and study them rigorously.  The same due diligence applies to any company that wants to license your work.  And, generally, be aware of ways to safeguard yourself from being a victim of identity theft.

It’s strange when I wrote Mr. Martins back saying that I suspected his interest in my work was actually a scam and threatened to turn his message over to the Attorney General’s Office, he never wrote back, although I assume his wife’s birthday was just as imminent as before.  Sadly, he now probably wants to “purchase” other art work for her.

Just don’t let it be yours.

For more information on art scams, visit this site at ArtWanted and this site (with email examples) by Max Magnum Norman.

~/~

What has to be one of the strangest narratives I’ve seen in the twelve years I’ve been involved with fractal art?  This tale found on LaPurr’s journal on deviantART.  It’s worth reading an extended excerpt:

A while back, out of nowhere, I was contacted by this person ~debora321 asking me if I’d try out her program, Fractal Magic, FMSetup.exe which was supposed to help render UF images more quickly. I don’t recall exactly what else she said about the program and I wasn’t really interested but I downloaded the program just to check it out. When I tried to open it, my computer went a bit nuts so I deleted the program and cleaned my computer. I wrote to her and told her that she had a problem and she said she’d fix it and for me to try again. There’s no way I’d open anything of hers again, so that was the end of it.

For me, anyway.

I got a note today from ~0Encrypted0, who told me that he was also contacted by ~debora321 regarding her little program. He tried to open the program and as a result, she somehow managed to get hold of params of his. He wrote in part:

…it looks like my computer was hacked when I downloaded a file called FMSetup.exe that debora321 asked me to try out.

I think some or all of my Ultra Fractal parameters were copied.

He sent me links to a couple of images that clearly show she ripped his params somehow.

Here is his original image from January 16:

Here is her version from October 15:

Here is his latest version to showcase the likeness, with links to the other images:

I have to assume that this woman somehow got ~0Encrypted0‘s params.

If you were one of those people who was contacted by her, and I’ve seen some of your names on her user page, I urge you to go through her gallery and see if any of your images are there, in a slightly altered form. See if any images you recognize are there. Most importantly, I think you need to get her program off your computer. Whatever you choose to do, please be careful.

When I first read about this incident, I thought it was a hoax.  I mean, why go to the trouble to build malware designed  simply to steal Ultra Fractal parameter files?  Why risk committing art theft — not to mention facing criminal charges — just to repost someone else’s par files, minimally altered, as your own on a popular and highly trafficked Fractalbook site?  Did the alleged perpetrator think no one would notice — especially those artists she personally invited to download and run her supposedly UF-enhancing program?

And while puzzling out the motive for such an inherently epic fail scheme, check out one of the more engaging comments about this whole bizarre business:

laurengary says:

You know, reading everyone’s comments & answers & one word Kat, one word came instantly to mind….that this is/was a form of a …fractal rape. Kinda sorta. Sorry for sounding so melodramatic, *grimaces* but honestly, that’s the first thing I thought of.

No, actually, rape is like rape.  What this is like is hacking computers to commit art theft.  I understand there might be some sense of being violated here, but still what you are like doing is being hyperbolic.

And here’s another choice comment from the alleged thief’s nearly empty DA page:

ChaosApostle notes:

I wouldn’t be surprised if an e-mob were to be incited and show up at your door.

Really?  Where can Tim and I get some of those virtual torches and pitchforks?  We’re planning to do some score-settling travel this summer.

The insults really take flight in the alleged thief’s home page comments and range from the expected “pathetic” to the inflammatory “art whore.”  “Sad” also comes up repeatedly.  I do find this whole situation to be sad.

And unnecessary.  One thing you can say about UF users: Many are not shy about sharing their parameter files.  There are stockpiled databases of such files, and the Ultra Fractal Mailing List has near daily posts of them — often inviting tweaking by others.  Why steal?

If proven guilty, the person who committed this hoax and hacking should be condemned.  DeviantArt should ban her.  She should be reported to the proper authorities, and they should investigate and, if warranted, take all appropriate legal actions against her.

Nor do I blame people for being upset by her duplicity.  =Velvet–Glove summed up the sense of personal betrayal that many others also clearly felt:

I gave you personal help and advice… and you repaid my kindness by trying to hack into and invade my computer in order to steal my work and data? I’m outraged!

But our fractal art communities should do a little soul-searching, too.  I once compared Fractalbook to high school cliques, and never has the analogy seemed more true to me.  Are people becoming so desperate for the fishing-for-compliments rituals that pass for discourse about art on Fractalbook sites that they’re willing to go to such lengths for a few kind words?  There’s certainly individual neediness pushed to criminal lengths on display here.  But there’s also an unflattering picture of the hierarchical social structure of online environments — small pond star systems that are ostensibly about art but are actually soap operas revolving around who gets the status and privilege of sitting at the virtual cafeteria table with the cool kids.  What’s sad is to see how many earlier love-and-kisses comments (thanks for the watch/favorite/star!!) the alleged thief has on her deserted home page — many from the same people who now call her an “art whore” or speculate on whether the Mafia has obtained her virus program and “will be on a plane to your house in no time to kill you for such a thing.”

~/~

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Talking Tall: Final Chapter

“I had to stand up for myself alone, and you saw what they did to me…
Until all men can stand up for what they believe in, THE SAME DAMN THING CAN HAPPEN TO ANY ONE OF YOU!”

– Sheriff Buford Pusser, 1977, Walking Tall: Final Chapter

Okay, I think I’ve got it all figured out now, how the whole fractal art scene/community/world works.  Let me just put down my cudgel for a second because it’s hard to type with.  For mental navigational purposes, let me say this: I will start with listing what I personally consider to be the main characteristics of the online fractal world, some of which have puzzled me for years, and then go on to explain what I think the source of those features and mysteries are –why the fractal world is the way it is. Keep your shoes on, there’s broken a lot of broken glass around.

A few enduring (stubborn?) aspects to the online fractal art world:

  • Conservative tastes in art
  • Little interest in avant garde, radical ideas
  • Little reference and connection to the larger art world
  • Concentration on a single program and style of work
  • Lots of people actively engaged and producing artwork
  • Very stable and established community and leadership
  • Skill-based, not artwork based status (eg. Rocket Scientists)
  • Seniority based authority is generally accepted

And here’s what I think explains all that:

The interest that most people have in fractal art is the pursuit of rich, ornamental imagery... These people have been drawn to the program Ultra Fractal, because that’s the most effective tool for making that type of artwork. The internet enables these people to network with each other and they’ve gradually established, over the years, a large but informal organization revolving around their mutual interest in UF. I’ll call it the UF Guild; UFG. The higher skill level and greater experience of the older users along with their continued leadership in the development of UF resources justifies their higher status and authority in the eyes of newer members, who also value those things and want to pursue them like the older members have. People who lack such similar interests gain little from their association with the UFG and having little attachment to it, drift away. Over the years, the UFG has increased in size and in the support of its members to the point where it’s now able to convincingly present itself and its art to people outside the fractal art world as the contemporary standard in fractal art.  It would not be a great exaggeration to say that the UFG has become the fractal art world.

Are the contests public or private? Universal or Specialized?
Their annual contests, administered by senior members have become annual awards ceremonies establishing the reputation and talents of newer members while perpetuating those of the older ones. The defence that such contests are private events and shouldn’t be compared with contests that are public where contestants commonly expect judging to follow the customs of fairplay and impartiality is paradoxicly both a reasonable one and not. It’s reasonable in the sense that the UFG is an exclusive, but voluntary, association of artists with a demonstrated preferences and bias for the rich, ornamental artwork that is almost exclusively made with UF.  And yet the UFG has also come to incorporate the majority of what would be considered the fractal art world, or fractal “public”, and in such a “public” setting, the status that so many senior members have as judges and the personal connections they have with each other would be seen as unprofessional because in a public setting such conflicts of interest in judging generally lead to suspicions of abuse even when abuse does not actually occur. But, among the members of the UFG, there is no weakening of their confidence in the judging because they already know these people and trust them to behave in a way which benefits the UFG as they’ve already done for years. There is artistic bias among the judges and in the restrictions placed on submissions, but this “bias” is shared by almost all of the fractal art community, whom, as I’ve mentioned, pretty well make up the UFG itself these days.

If the contest wants to represent all of fractal art, then it needs to become more inclusive and adopt policies that will give every contestant a reasonable degree of confidence in the judging. If however, the contest wants to focus on UF style artwork and artists, then there is little reason to change anything as this is the way the UFG has smoothly operated for years and only UFG members will want to enter anyway.  With the exception of Orbit Trap’s two editors and maybe a few other individuals, there are no serious objections from the fractal art community in how the contest is designed, run, or the final selections it makes.  And this is the conundrum: The UFG has grown to include the majority of fractal artists and has redefined what fractal art is –for most people.  And that is artwork which can be described as rich and ornamental, made in the multi-layered and multi-talented program, Ultra Fractal.  When one speaks of the “fractal art community” they’re really talking about the UFG, whether they’re aware of it or not.  I said similar things two and a half years ago here.

Orbit Trap and the Clash of Fractal Civilizations
This is where Orbit Trap entered the scene. I think you can see better (I can) where the huge differences in perspective on the contests came from. Damien Jones, the organizer of the BMFAC has argued that the contest is not a community event, by which I believe he’s trying to say, it’s a really a special event with “special” rules and practices. He also repeatedly used the defence that the contest’s rules and selection panel were clear and obvious to anyone entering the contest and since no one has to pay an entrance fee or has any reason to enter the contest other than having their work judged by the selection panel there’s really nothing anyone has to complain about. His efforts made the contest a reality and yes his friends make up almost all of the judges and there is definitely a bias toward UF and that kind of artwork, but as I’ve mentioned, it’s a bias shared by most members of the fractal art world, so he could say it’s a very popular “bias” or just business as usual in the UFG.  If the organizer himself was to be replaced with a randomly selected member of the fractal art world with adequate ability, I believe the contest would remain pretty much the same as it is because a blind hand reaching into the fractal art world would probably pick up another UFG member, who has the same perspective.

It ain’t just the fractal art world that’s like this…
It’s these things about the fractal art world that my theory of the Ultra Fractal Guild is an attempt to explain. How well my theory fits the facts as other people see them is another matter. The online world can have a lot of blanks and explaining what goes on there and especially why it goes on, can require a lot of filling in because finding out isn’t often possible. Members of this “alleged” UFG have access to information that I don’t and I’m sure my theory will be greeted with suspicion by most of them (assuming they’re reading it) because I think I’m regarded as a “hostile witness”, as they say on TV. It’s not my intention or desire to pass judgment on the UFG as to whether it’s a good thing or whatever, but just to describe it for those who might be interested in how the fractal art world is composed and how it functions. I find it all rather interesting because I think the UFG exists in similar forms in other online digital art venues because the context I’m sure must be pretty much the same. I think the growth and development of the UFG is a natural one, given the type of interests it revolves around and the type of people attracted to those sorts of things. That’s why I compare it to a guild; an ancient and universal social group, because people tend to cluster and form these sorts of organizations out of mutual benefit in many social contexts in an almost spontaneous way.

Next Part: Continental Drift in the Fractal World: Art and Craft don’t eat together.
Technorati Tags:

The Fractal Art Guild: How it works

In Part 1 I had said that Part 2 would be the Guild in action, but I think I need to clarify this whole notion of a Fractal Art Guild a bit better before going on.  I really think most of the fractal art world functions like a large association of craftsmen whose closest analogy would be a medieval guild.  I emphasize the world “functions” because the members of this guild do not formally identify with such an association.  In fact, the idea that they’re all part of some guild-like structure probably sounds semi-insane to them or conspiratorial.  But that’s because the 21st century online world has changed the way people associate and similarly changes the appearance of such associations that they often aren’t recognized as formal associations even thought that’s exactly how they function.

The Fractal Art Guild is informal.  One’s membership is really nothing more that an attitude of cooperation and agreement. This shared interest in the things of the Guild is the only thing that defines it in the online context. But that’s all it really needs because ultimately the Guild is a collection of like-minded people, not an ideology or constitution. Membership is dedication to the group and this sort of friendship association appeals very much to people today and functions easily in an online context of email, chat, forums, and mailing lists. It’s the daily or regular online interaction with the Guild which serves to initiate, maintain and renew one’s membership in the Guild as well as to foster it’s development taking eager members to higher levels. The online environment creates a sort of dynamic, living association which makes the traditional, formal indicators of membership: applications; membership cards; meetings; newsletters; and annual dinners look trivial and superficial –mere tokens of membership. In the online environment where people network on a daily or even hourly basis, membership is proven and demonstrated (or disproven and betrayed) in a much more meaningful way that it is in offline groups where interaction between most members is remote and occasional.

I said, the things of the Guild, I should explain that.  The interests of the Guild, as I see it (am I the only one who sees it?), are:

  • Producing fractal art of high complexity and graphical sophistication
  • Ultra Fractal and all things UF-related (to put it bluntly)
  • Promoting the mastery of UF
  • Showing respect for UF Master Craftsmen and trying to learn from them
  • Promoting the use of UF as the apex in fractal art software
  • Defending the reputation of UF and it’s Master Craftsmen (post Orbit Trap)
  • If you’ve got a problem, just leave, don’t make a scene
  • Anyone can join

I know, maybe it sounds like another one of my anti-UF diatribes…  But it’s not.  It’s more complex than that.  It’s not “us vs. them”.  Remember how I said, “One’s membership is really nothing more that an attitude of cooperation and agreement” ?  A number of the Master Craftsmen of the Guild made Ultra Fractal (contributed in some way, large or small) and they promote it’s use and try to aid others in learning how to use it better because that’s the sort of tool they admire.  They like fractal art that is complex and very, very graphically refined and sophisticated –slick and professional.  It’s purely a matter of personal preference and that’s the kind of art they prefer and the kind of software needed to make it.  The Guild thinks that the best fractal art –the most impressive fractal art– is the kind that the Master Craftsmen in the Guild make.  It’s this sort of common cause and shared interest that holds them together and attracts apprentices (newcomers of similar bent) to them.  Like-mindedness is what it’s all about, not coercion or intimidation.

I know it’s a lot to swallow all at once.  It took me a few years, so I don’t expect to hear others shouting “Eureka!” right away.  In fact, I suspect most fractal artists don’t really care about these “online social structures” at all.  But they will when they read the next part, Part 3.

You may have noticed my heavy use of the term, “Craft”.  Sharp members of the audience will suspect I’ve got a reason for not using the more common expression, Art or Artist.  You see the Guild structure isn’t just about building up a community of artists around the use of UF and supporting the attempt of others to develop their mastery of it.  The type of hegemonic and class-based organization that all guilds have, along with it’s amazing stability, is a direct result of their common pursuit of craft as opposed to art.  Art is too much of a hot potato for any big group to handle for very long without self-destructing.  The Guild members, from the smallest to the greatest, all have the heart of a craftsman.  Not surprisingly, they also have the minds and values of craftsmen too.  And what’s that?  It’s coming up next…

Part 3: Artists and Craftsmen: What’s the Difference?

Technorati Tags:

Understanding Fractal Art: The Guild

In order to understand the current fractal art world you need only to learn a bit about the concept called a guild.  I believe the majority of fractal artists are members of a rather pervasive fractal art guild.  In fact, I would go so far as to suggest that almost all of the angst expressed by members of the fractal art community towards the criticisms Orbit Trap has made regarding the Benoit Mandelbrot Fractal Art Contests and the Fractal Universe Calendar can be simply explained as two very different groups misunderstanding each other.  (Not all the angst, just most of it.)

But first, let’s look at what a guild is.  “A guild is an association of craftsmen in a particular trade” according to the Wikipedia page.  It’s people who have some activity in common coming together.  And guilds (according to the Wikipedia article) existed almost wherever you had skilled tradespeople; not just medieval Europe but on every continent and civilization.  It seems to me that craftsmen forming associations was an almost innate, natural and universal characteristic of skilled people throughout history.

But in human history these “craftsmen associations” had some other more specific characteristics in common:

  • Well defined hierarchy of membership in which leaders arise gradually from promotion within the guild
  • Extensive apprenticeship training period in which younger members acquired skills and proved their loyalty to the guild
  • Secrets of the trade restricted to guild members only and therefore the exclusive property of the guild itself
  • Leaders govern by virtue of their status and not by adherence to a constitution or written laws

A couple relevant quotes from the Wikipedia page (incidentally, from a section without references or sources…)

The guild was made up by experienced and confirmed experts in their field of handicraft. They were called master craftsmen. Before a new employee could rise to the level of mastery, he had to go through a schooling period during which he was first called an apprentice. After this period he could rise to the level of journeyman. Apprentices would typically not learn more than the most basic techniques until they were trusted by their peers to keep the guild’s or company’s secrets.

[…]

After this journey and several years of experience, a journeyman could be received as master craftsman, though in some guilds this step could be made straight from apprentice. This would typically require the approval of all masters of a guild, a donation of money and other goods (often omitted for sons of existing members), and the production of a so-called masterpiece, which would illustrate the abilities of the aspiring master craftsman; this was often retained by the guild.

I think you get the idea.  The fractal art guild isn’t exactly like this, but generally speaking, there are a number of characteristics of the current fractal art scene which suggest it operates just like a traditional guild did.  There is no formal, Fractal Art Guild, but that’s because such formality has never been necessary.  In today’s online communities, there is enough communication and interaction for fractal artists to easily learn the rules of the game and to see these unwritten rules in action.  In fact, the contests, the BMFAC and the Calendar, are clear examples of the Guild in action.

And when I say “the Guild”, I’m not just talking about the leadership, I’m also talking about the lesser membership.  Traditionally, apprentices were not considered members of the guild, per se, but I include them as such because they are part –a very important part– of the whole guild structure.  The guild-like behavior of the contests’ leadership is further expanded upon and confirmed by the guild-like behavior of the apprentices.  In fact, it wasn’t until I began to ruminate on the behavior of the rank and file membership of the Guild that I actually began to realize that there was a guild at all.  A privileged elite does not constitute a guild.  It’s only when a large, underprivileged class desperately wants to join and serve that elite that a Guild is born.  Ironically, 21st century digital art guilds are grassroots movements; bottom-up movements.  One or two sharp individuals who are shrewd enough to know which way the crowd is heading get out and run in front of them until the herd comes to see them as leading and they subsequently are seen as leaders.

That pretty much describes how the Fractal Art Guild was born.

Part 2: The Guild in action — “The contest is not a community event!”

Technorati Tags:

Ups and Downs of the 2009 Benoit Mandelbrot Fractal Art Contest

Ups and Downs

Ups and Downs.  Design by Roller Coaster Tycoon.

The 2009 Benoit Mandelbrot Fractal Art Contest results have been announced.  If you’re a regular OT reader, you already got this news.  We announced it on Thursday — apparently before the contest itself was ready to do so.  When, on the UF Mailing List, one of the judges noted on Saturday that he “had to find out from OT” about the announcement, the BMFAC director graciously showed up to explain:

No you didn’t miss the announcement. I had enough time on Thursday to post the winners and open up display of the entries, but didn’t have enough time to craft an appropriate announcement. And frankly I wasn’t ready to encourage a flood of visitors until I had enough time to respond in case there were server problems, so I thought I would make the announcement today. It seems OT’s obsession with something they hate has made such an announcement unnecessary.

Moral of the story: Do not make a web page live until you are like totally ready to have it be seen by the public.  This moral applies whether one is engaging in art competition pre-sorting judging or art competition post-sorting judging.

And let’s also note a conundrum.  It’s hard to deny the privileges Ultra Fractal enjoys in a certain fractal art contest — a contest that says it’s specifically dedicated to bringing the richness and diversity of fractal art to “a world that largely does not know it” — when the contest director’s official communiqués are delivered via the small-pond vehicle of — wait for it — the Ultra Fractal Mailing List.

But I’m getting in a snit already, and I haven’t even started.  Let’s begin again…

~/~

As Tim announced on Thursday, the winners of the 2009 BMFAC are in.  I’m sure Tim and I will be writing more about this year’s iteration of the contest in the future.  We like writing about the contest, as some of you have probably noticed, although, truly, we long for the day when we will no longer have to.  Unfortunately, that day is not today, and, at least at this early stage, all I can tell you are my initial impressions.

~/~

What’s up:

The judges still do not have work officially entered into the exhibition.  Twenty-five winning images were selected, and none of them were by a currently serving BMFAC judge.  This significant change in contest procedure is to be commended; it unquestionably advances the credibility and professionalism of BMFAC.  I’d like to think OT had a hand in bringing about this change, although I’m sure BMFAC Central will claim such was the design all along.  Whatever the reason, it’s a positive change.

Naturally, OT will take a kind of Reagan-based “Trust but Verify” attitude in this matter, since we remember that falls off turnip trucks hurt.  We’ve seen October Surprise talk before of sponsors insisting and hedges against sufficient quality used as fresh clarion calls to hang up judges’ art.  The philanthropic graciousness of BMFAC Central has traditionally been bookended with dollops of self-publicity and grabs for personal or financial gain.  I wonder if the director and the selection panel will continue to be satisfied with consistently sitting out of the big show — with not being counted among “the most important fractal artists in the world.”  Will “prestigious” judging and pushing Ultra Fractal like Pepsi be satisfying enough for them?

~/~

Other ups:

One winner was a former BMFAC judge.  Several other former BMFAC judges did not win.  You know what that sounds like?  Fairness.  This round goes to the current judges.  Praise where praise is due.

Was it just me, or did there seem like better variety and a little more experimentation in this year’s winners?  It wasn’t quite as much of the usual UF parade of layered pancakes.  Some of the images were striking and inventive, especially those of Ramon Pasternak and Natalie Kelsey.

Every winner should be congratulated and deserves every accolade that comes their way because of their achievement.  OT has never had a problem with BMFAC’s winners — only with its administrators and sponsors.

The flash mob of 50+ alternates and honorable mentions that cropped up on the love fest that was the 2007 BMFAC winner’s page are gone and definitely not missed.  More good work — and thanks for that much needed purge.  I understand not wanting to hurt feelings and offer encouragement, but three-fourths of contest contestants do not need to have their egos stroked.  It cheapens the accomplishments of the exhibition winners.  Besides, we already have a near 100% delivery system for such an I’m OK You’re OK vibe.  It’s called Fractalbook.

~/~

What’s down:

More serious attention should be given to removing conflicts of interest from the competition.  It’s tawdry, not to mention highly unprofessional and ethically questionable, to include fractal software authors as judges.  The conflict of interest should be obvious: there is an increased opportunity for such persons to benefit financially or personally.  Whether the profit or publicity is a little or a lot does not matter; the principle should be sacrosanct.  As I noted in my earlier post about the nature of  conflicts of interest, even the mere perception of a conflict of interest should be a concern and could corrode trust in the legitimacy of a contest.  Garth Thornton, originally a judge for this year’s BMFAC, came to this understanding and resigned.  He is a honorable man, as well as a talented artist, and I respect him for his courageous stand.

I have little respect for the other two software authors who refused to resign, for I find them much less honorable.  Did they not see the same conflicts of interest Garth did, or were they looking the other direction at potential perks that might come from serving as judges?  Their decision to remain on the selection panel contaminates the integrity of the competition and should call the evenhandedness of the results into question.

BMFAC should establish a detailed conflict of interest policy and post it publicly on the contest’s rules page.  No software authors can serve as judges out of concern for their own commercial or professional gain.  Judges who teach fractal art classes must recuse themselves from judging their own students.  Other similar stuff.  Put it all in writing.  Examples of conflict of interest polices are all over The Google.  Everyone will be less suspicious if the contest administration at least shows awareness of such common, ethical practices.

Stop favoring Ultra Fractal at every turn.  Ultra Fractal’s author is a judge.  More than half the judging panel are commonly known as UF artists.  The contest director is an acknowledged UF zealot.  Worst of all, relax those absurd monumental image size restrictions.  Bigger is not necessarily better for an art exhibition.  Most photography shows are not comprised of picture window sized prints — and photographs surely have as much detail as fractal art.  Moreover, you’ll reap adding more diversity and variety to the competition — as well as come closer to the aim of showing a representative sampling of contemporary fractal art.  If you continue to so openly privilege UF, then just call the whole affair an Ultra Fractal contest and create a small category called “Other” for those few winners who slip through the UF sieve.

These recommendations do matter.  Failing to make these changes will allow doubts to remain and fester about the fairness and professionalism of the contest.  Here’s why.

I spent some time Googling each of this year’s BMFAC winners.  Most of them have web sites or community galleries.  In some cases, I found their winning images posted online to various web sites, blogs, or art communities.  Other winners had essays online where they discussed their art and mentioned the programs they use.  A few winners were blank slates; there was little or no information about them.

Using this data, I made a best guess estimate of the programs used by each winner to create his or her winning image.  I stress that I am guessing, but the guesses are reasonable and made after careful study.  Of course, BMFAC does not release such information, nor would it be in their best interests to do so.  They probably don’t want you dwelling on how many UF images there are per square inch of BMFAC’s exhibitions.  So, admitting my own scientific guesswork, here’s how the contest shook out for me*:

Ultra Fractal: 14
Apophysis
: 5
Xenodream
: 1
Fractal Domains
: 1
Unknown: 4

Assuming my conjectures are fairish, and granting a margin of error (or further additions from unknowns to the UF or Apo stats), it becomes clearer why those conflicts of interests and restrictive file sizes are bones of contention.  Let’s go to the math.

76% of the winning images appear to be made with either UF or Apo.  And the authors of both of those programs served as contest judges.  What’s that smell in the air?  Could it be — the scent of undue influence?

56% of the winning images appear to be made with UF (or more, if any of the four unknowns are also UF based).  This is actually a bit lower than in previous BMFAC exhibitions (especially if one counts the “invited” work by judges).  Still, what’s the overriding impression?  The proclivities of half the selection panel, not to mention those UF friendly and easily scalable image size restrictions, are paying off for UF — still unofficially BMFAC’s product-placed and teacher’s pet software.

Let’s face it.  If you don’t use UF — or don’t have a machine powerful enough to render Apo at quilt sizes — your chances of winning a spot in a BMFAC exhibition are remote.  I’d say they are about the same as a non-spiral had gaining admission into the pages of the now defunct Fractal Universe Calendar.

If the competition is going to continue to so heavily privilege only one or two fractal programs, then the merchandising and publicity of BMFAC should come clean and reflect this fact.

~/~

Other bads:

Tim has already addressed the shake-your-head, cloying obsequiousness of an image openly paying homage to a BMFAC judge somehow ending up in the winner’s circle.  In the VU meter of unprofessionalism, this bit buries the needle as deeply into the red as it can go.  Here’s a tip for those wanting to do better next go around. Start now building a series of tribute images dedicated to possible judges for BMFAC 2011.

One individual, who has never been a judge, has hit the trifecta and now won a space in a BMFAC exhibition for the third straight time.  I guess we can safely conclude that he is either a) the most important fractal artist in the universe, or b) a devout water-carrier for all things BMFAC who is consistently being rewarded for his loyal service to the cause.  The scales of justice want to know which way to tilt on this either/or issue.

If you’re going to say in your selection criteria that you want work that is “uniquely fractal; artwork that uses fractal tools to produce less-fractal imagery is not as desirable,” then you should probably be diligent to select such work.  At least several of the winning images have little discernible fractal structure.  Other people have noticed this slip, too — like former BMFAC judge Samuel Monnier who makes a similar criticism on his blog.  Hopefully, he won’t now start receiving those why-don’t-you-just-shut-up and go-start-your-own-art-contest if you-think-you-know-everything comments OT routinely receives.

The BMFAC selection criteria also notes the following:

We would prefer you create new artwork for this contest. Existing works may also be submitted, but we are more likely to select artwork that is new and fresh.

However, a number of winning images were not created solely for the contest.

This image appeared on Renderosity in August of 2008.
This image
appeared on DeviantArt in August of 2009.
This image
appeared on DeviantArt in July of 2008 under a different title.
This image
appeared on DeviantArt in October of 2009.
This image
appeared on DeviantArt in June of  2009.
This image
appeared on DeviantArt in March of 2009.
This image
appeared on Renderosity in September of 2008.
This image
appears on the artist’s website with a copyright date of 2008.

I quit surfing around at this point, since I had now found one-third of BMFAC’s winning entries were not newly created for the competition.  Again, why bother to insist upon this criterion if it’s going to be so loosely enforced.  Not that good role models were always provided.  Even when the judges were sneaking their work in the back door, did they follow their own suggested stipulations?  Not always.  The director’s “invited” selection for the 2006 BMFAC exhibition was made in 2001.

Finally, the director needs to build an announcements page for BMFAC.  That way breaking information about the competition can be quickly posted and easily checked.  A contest info page would be a convenient spot for stuff like photos and reviews of the exhibition — unless, like the 2007 exhibition, there’s going to be a total news blackout on the show instead.  Moreover, using the Ultra Fractal Mailing List as the official organ for disseminating BMFAC updates gives the appearance of favoring UF insiders over everyone else.  Worse, it makes those of us who don’t want our inboxes crammed with round robin UF tweaking games feel more than a little left out.

~/~

*This graph is only a guess.  Treating this graph like a fact will likely increase the risk of side effects like emotional outbursts, outraged emails, virtual gnashing of teeth, and erectile dysfunction — which, as everyone knows, is caused by everything.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Have they no shame?

Yes, the winners of the Benoit Mandelbrot 2009 Fractal Art Contest are now out (and this time it’s final).  I’m skipping the usual clever art critic review for now because there’s something that’s just too outrageous not to comment on right off the bat.  If you’ve seen the 2009 winners page you might have missed it –unless you were able to read between the initials!

First off, Joseph Presley has done a nice job on his winning entry, so don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing about the quality of the work that would exclude it from the winner’s circle at any BMFAC for that reason.  I might even go so far as to say I rather like this one somewhat and that Joe has used his multi-faceted image style very effectively once again.  As many of you will know from reading this blog, I’m not a big fan of the heavy and complicated layering that most Ultra Fractal artists use, but Joe has managed to preserve the image’s interesting fractal structures while doing a lot of surface texturing at the same time.  He’s enhanced the image tastefully, not layered it into some monstrosity.

But giving it the title, “Tribute to Janet Parke”?  That’s too much.  Surely even you dyed in wool BMFAC zealots will have to admit that naming your entry a “Tribute” to one of the judges is going just a little too far?

Oh, yes.  You’re right.  Sorry.  He’s changed the name to a very cryptic and obscure set of initials, “JP”.  Hmmn.. Why, come to think of it, that could even be interpreted as “Tribute to Joseph Presley“!  I guess I must be jumping to conclusions again, or reading sinister motives into innocent mistakes or computer glitches.  Sure.  Except there’s a bit more to this “JP-thing” than what the contest site tells you.

For those of you who lack internet access, I have made this screenshot of a gallery page from Joseph Presley’s Renderosity gallery.  Why a screenshot?  Well, because I know from past reporting on events in the fractal art world that these sorts of pages have a tendency to go offline whenever I comment on them.  It wouldn’t surprise me if this one becomes a similar embarrassment to the BMFAC and gets “adjusted” accordingly.  Here it is, if you want to check it for yourself.

There’s more.  In case you can’t read the fine print, here’s what it says beneath the image:

Created w/ UF4 for my friend Janet Parke.

Janet Parke is one of my personal favorites for sure. Not only is her artwork fantastically beautiful, she contributes to the fractal community as an instructor, sharing her time and knowledge with the fractal world. She has been a mentor to me and I find her talents truly inspirational. She has also been a friend to me, offering assistance and great advise anytime I’ve needed it. Last year I had the wonderful opportunity of meeting her in person and found her to be most friendly, intelligent and very fun to chat with.

Check out her galleries at www.infinite-art.com

Thank you Janet, for everything! I think you are fabulous.

Joseph Presley

But you know, maybe none of the judges saw this before the judging took place and if they took my advice and concluded that “JP” was the initials for the artist and not the judge, Janet Parke, then everything’s fine and all’s well in the land.  But it’s been up on Renderosity since August 25, 2008.  That’s 2008.  It’s been up for a year and two months.  And there’s two pages of gushing comments hanging down like ancient stalactites from it.

Which brings me to another thing: the rules for the BMFAC 2009 state:

3.6. Existing Works: We would prefer you create new artwork for this contest. Existing works may also be submitted, but we are more likely to select artwork that is new and fresh.

Is this one too old?  It was made after the last BMFAC in 2007, but almost a year before the call for submissions to the 2009 contest was made.  I’m sure other artists have submitted work more than a year old and maybe even won, but this one’s made the rounds at Renderosity and was featured in the special Fractal Window Weekly #200.  Joe’s a well-known fractal artist, so I wouldn’t be surprised if most of the contestants as well as the judges had seen this image before it became an entry to the BMFAC.  Not a big deal, really, but the rules state they want “fresh” stuff, and why would they say that unless they want fresh stuff?

Hey, he gave it a fresh title.  There you go.  And sometimes a title can really change people’s interpretation of fractal art.

Technorati Tags:

A History of the Orbit Trap Blog

Chapter One:  From Kumbaya to Pitchforks

Although Orbit Trap is really nothing more than a niche blog that publishes once or twice a week, and I don’t see anything in the future likely to change that, three years is a long time on the internet and I thought some of our readers might find a brief recounting of its history to be of interest, as small and trivial as it might seem in the context of the Blogosphere and the Internet in general.

Sometime in the summer of 2006 Tim Hodkinson (that’s me), and Terry Wright wanted to create some sort of online presence that would bring together and generate fresh ideas and perspectives on fractal art and to serve as a sort of online showcase for them, both to fractal artists themselves and to the fractal art interested public as well.  Our hope was to stimulate, or at the very least, suggest more progressive and innovative directions in fractal art.

A blog wasn’t our first choice.  In fact, our first idea was a “Best Of” fractal art gallery.  We thought this would be a good way to bring good ideas in fractal art to greater attention and hopefully greater use; showcase the best artwork in one place.  But the more we considered the difficulties of getting “The Best” artists to allow us to showcase their work, made difficult by painful past experiences with other similar online projects, and also the difficulty in actually finding more progressive and innovative fractal art works to start with — we thought something more along the lines of a community forum, discussion, brainstorming kind of thing would be better.

A forum, despite its apparent ability and intended design to bring together many people and enable them to exchange ideas, was quickly tossed out as they tend, in practice, to become shout-fests and verbal, team wrestling events.  That is, when they’re not being derailed by some total neophyte who wants to jump into the thread without even having read the previous postings. Besides, there had been plenty of forums in the past (and there still are) but they haven’t really brought about any sort of artistic awakening among those who participate in them.  Forums seem to end up serving a small number of specialized social functions.  But aside from that, a forum was too wide open and chaotic for the sort of progressive online thing we were looking to make.

I guess a blog was our last choice.  But we thought that if we could get many other people from the fractal world to join it then it would have a chance at being the sort of collective, all-inclusive and importantly, intelligent venue for fresh ideas in fractal art.  A blog posting was a nice way for someone to say something or propose some alternative point of view without being drowned out or “anonymized” in a forum thread.  Blogging puts the emphasis on the initial posting while comments, like footnotes, are there for those who want to add something or go deeper if they care to.  We really had faith in the community to generate innovative ideas and styles if only someone could find a way to get it all started.  It had all the optimism of the original builders of the Tower of Babel and almost the same results.

We tried it out in August of 2006 by sending invitations out to about 20 or 30 of the most prominent people involved in fractal art at the time.  They weren’t just artists, they were anyone who we thought might have something relevant to add to the great online meeting of minds.  Programmers, of course, and also other people who’d shown a thoughtful interest in fractal art in the past.  Even folks whose interests were more strictly in the area of algorithmic art, but were still relevant to fractal art and bordered on it.

Not everyone was interested.  Many had misgivings about having to produce some sort of written article for a posting once a month.  (That was a foreshadowing of the collapse of Orbit Trap as a community project to come.)  Most were excited simply to be part of the next new thing in the fractal art world.  You can go and see all those community postings over at the Blogger site.

I mentioned that contributors had to post once a month?  Well, what do you do when they don’t?  How do you approach someone, someone prominent in fractal art world, who’s “delinquent” in their postings and who was enticed to join the blog when you told them it would be easy?  I’m not talking about lazy people, either.  I’m talking about people who were very busy with their own work, the sort of work that brought them to our attention in the first place and made us think, “So and so’s knowledge and skill would make them a great contribution to the blog”.

After sending out two of these “reminder notices” we decided we had to rethink things.  On the one hand, the blog would end up being written by just the both of us if no one else posted anything; on the other hand, hassling people to do something they otherwise wouldn’t do was rather distasteful –for both parties.

We changed the one post a month rule to once every three months around October and started sending out more invitations hoping that we’d eventually have enough postings guarantee enough content to keep our readers interested.  We eventually we had to change the rule to post whenever you get around to it (or else start the hassling all over again) and then waited to see if that easy-going, relaxed atmosphere helped the situation.  It didn’t.  About six months into the life of the blog, a drought set in and stayed.  We had enough contributors still hanging on to keep going, but for the most part they only posted their once a month requirement, and with so few others it was too sporadic and thin to keep an audience much less attract one.  Readers would drop in because of the prestigious contributor list we had in the sidebar of the blog, but there was no growth in readership.

Around June of 2007, despite the fact that most contributors, for all intents and purposes, had drifted away we still clung to the notion of a big community discussion about fractal art issues fueled by blog postings made by a diverse number of people.  It just seemed to be such a good idea; so much talent and experience all in one place.  We couldn’t figure out why in such a fertile environment of fractal artistry such a drought in content was occurring.  But now a new problem was arising.  And this time it ate at the core of the whole project: our own apathy.

You see, it sounds great to include everyone in a project and for sure, on the surface, it looks like the United Nations of the fractal art world; but the effect of such group projects isn’t creative thinking and innovation, it’s a crippling atmosphere of political correctness and general mental inhibition where every radical thought is met with “I can’t say that” and “People will take it the wrong way”.  No one wants to offend anyone.  And it affected us most of all since we were the ones managing the blog and placed in the role of trying to nudge people into speaking their mind and at the same time protect them from the resulting backlash when they expressed ideas about fractal art that clashed with the status quo.

Status quo.  That’s the very thing we wanted to break up in order to see artists be more creative and take more chances with their work rather than sit on their thrones.  But in the end, the group blog thing just became part of all that and now even we found the blog had become pointless, irrelevant and worst of all –boring.  But there were issues that needed to be dealt with; things that needed to be said; and ideas that needed to receive greater attention.  What never seemed to occur to either of us was that we should have just started a blog and written about those things ourselves and not involved all those other people whose forte and interests where in other areas of fractal art and not in the more journalistic pursuits like art criticism and community politics, like ours were.

So in late June of 2007 we began to post on what we thought were serious, meaningful and relevant topics in the fractal art world and if anyone got upset and left the blog, so be it.  And a few people did leave, most did so through the back door, but a few took the venue we had given them for intelligent commentary, to whine and complain about what jerks we were, and use it to make a public announcement that they were thoroughly disgusted with us and were now leaving the blog.   Terry’s web host even booted him off his server with the excuse that Terry had become a madman and that he feared for the safety of his server and all his (many, many) web clients on it.  This was the same man who had “kindly” offered to host the blog, for free, back in July of 2006 when we let him into our plans to launch a group fractal blog.  Good thing for Orbit Trap that we passed on that “kind offer”.

I think I got the ball rolling with my post about why I don’t use Ultra Fractal.  After the dust settled, Terry ignited an inferno by merely questioning, in the comments section of another posting, if fractal art contests were run ethically, considering the obvious conflicts of interest they contained in the way they were judged.  This was the beginning of many inquiries into the fractal art aristocracies known to most people as the Fractal Universe Calendar and the Benoit Mandelbrot Fractal Art Contest.  We pretty quickly became pariahs and those contributors who still hung on focused on their displeasure with Orbit Trap’s two moderators and their opinions.  Not one responded with a single intelligent response to the issues we’d actually raised.  But they did make clear how great their opposition was to frank and honest discussion of anything that involved themselves.  I was beginning to see for myself why the fractal art world was such a backward place.  The group blog idea was now actually a hindrance to serious commentary on fractal art issues and we finally put an end to that phase of Orbit Trap after those ather tumultuous three months, in mid-September of 2007, little more than a year from the date Orbit Trap was started.

Of course, we didn’t really have to “kick” anyone off.  By September of 2007 the vast majority hadn’t posted anything for months and, like I said, had drifted off to pursue other things after posting once or twice; they didn’t care for blogging.  The others only “got the muse” to write when we became the object of official outrage and an offense to all those who worshiped the fractal aristocrats or when they stuck to safe and harmless topics that made everyone relax and the readers go to sleep.  They used the comments section to ply their old online forum debating tricks and sabotaged the blog with their own inactivity or used it to proclaim their righteous departure.  I believe they truly thought that without their august presence the blog would surely wither and die.  They hated our criticism of the fractal art world and were probably
happy to be finished with Orbit Trap which was acquiring a somewhat
sinister reputation in fractal land.  If it were a Gothic horror movie, we would have been chased off by a pitchfork wielding mob bearing flaming torches and shouting, “The Monster!  The Monster!”

Actually the mob wouldn’t have been that big because (did I mention this?) most contributors simply lost interest in writing about fractal art and just silently returned to what they were doing before Orbit Trap came along.  I’ve come to realize that only a few people actually find blogging to be fun.  Similarly, there’s always a good sized audience for those who are inclined to do this sort of thing because there’s very little commentary on these sorts of cultural niche things like fractal art.  There’s no money in it, or anything like that, but if you enjoy the verbal sport itself, then there’s almost the same level of motivation as if you were being paid.  Maybe even more.

Most fractal art blogs are photo-blogs.  They’re the author’s own work and if there is any commentary to go with it it’s usually about how the artwork was made or named.  Nobody writes about fractal art in a broader, more theoretical or holistic way, except occasionally.  But it’s not that way with most other art forms.  In the area of photography, painting or sculpture there’s plenty of bloggers engaging in criticism and commentary –it’s a normal thing in the larger art world.  The fractal world just needs to come out of the dark ages it’s in.

But going back to our original intentions, we wanted to talk about fractal art itself, and not just about fractal artwork.  We wanted to create a venue that would engage in serious commentary and criticism of fractal art in general, things that were of significance to the entire genre.  We had a broader perspective on fractal art and wanted to see those sorts of issues expressed because it was absent.  But whenever we commented on the bigger picture: contests; web-rings; styles; Ultra Fractal; well-known people; there would always be a contributor who’d “go tribal” and leap up to defend their group against us.  Not against what we’d said, mind you, just against us personally; some sour, disgusted response complaining that we were complaining.  Not all were so primitive, some were very clever and careful, but always dodging the issues we’d raise.  There was never any honest dialogue.  Just posturing, of an extreme contortionist bent.  A good mascot for the fractal art community back then would have been one of those rubber figures with wires inside and bendable into any position imaginable.

Once we dispensed with all that community town hall meeting nonsense Orbit Trap really begin to pick up speed and sail away.  But we had to scrape those barnacles off or we’d end up abandoning the ship ourselves.  So in September of 2007 we got down to serious work and writing about important things without fear of being attacked and ridiculed from within our own ranks.  The problem with the contests being run entirely by insiders who used them to promote themselves cut to the core of what was wrong in the fractal world with respect to community politics.  The other problem with the contests of course was that they promoted a rather narrow view of fractal art that served the interests of the oligarchs but bored anyone who had an interest in real art.  The contests were a microcosm of the whole fractal art world: inbred and imitative.  The tight little groups that ran them gave them a correspondingly narrow perspective on fractal art.  I might have had some sympathy for these monopolists if they’d managed to actually produce a collection of artwork that was impressive.  As it was, their medieval guild mentality of entitlement produced calendars and contest exhibitions that were almost entirely filled with junk –and much of it was their own work!

If you check out the posting numbers on the original Blogger site where the archives are listed, you’ll see the trends I was talking about.  Big excitement in the first few months shown by the large number of postings and then a sudden and continued drought.  The numbers don’t show the whole picture though, you have to take a look at the postings and see how short most of them were.  Like I’ve said, most contributors were enticed to join the blog on the understanding that they’d give it a try and see how it went.  They gave it a try, but blogging wasn’t their thing.  And for those few that did continue to post, commentary and criticism was definitely not something they wanted to engage in –or even be connected with.  Fair enough, I thank them for coming out of their “comfort zone” and trying something new, but it became obvious by the end of the first year, in September of 2007, that only Terry and I were interested in pursuing this sort of fractal “journalism”.  It also became apparent that fractal journalism was what our readers were primarily interested in also.

Like most bloggers, we kept an eye on our web stats and feed subscription numbers using various methods.   When Orbit Trap started to address controversial issues like the dominance of Ultra Fractal and the aristocratic nature of the fractal community’s contests, more readers started tuning in and staying tuned in.  When we left the group format it became obvious that fresh criticism and commentary were what our readers where interested in even if our former contributors weren’t.  Back-slapping and endless hollow compliments were the hallmarks of artistic criticism in the fractal world up until that time.  People were clearly ready for something else.  I guess we should have started with that “something else” right from the start.  But I am thankful for the opportunity to have met so many big names in the fractal world –especially since now most of them would probably never want to meet me again.

Chapter Two:  Dark Lords of the Fractal Kingdom…

Technorati Tags:

Welcome to OrbitTrap.ca!

OrbitTrap.ca is our new address. Update your bookmarks and check out the new site! Actually, it’s all older stuff transferred from our archives over at the old, Blogger site.

Why did we move Orbit Trap to this site? Well, like any online publishing venture, we’ve changed and grown over the years and our web hosting needs have become more sophisticated. We need things that Blogger, as wonderful and generous as they’ve been to us over the years, isn’t able to provide.

“Oh?” you say. “What kind of things is big old Blogger not able to provide for tiny little Orbit Trap?”

Well, since you asked, rhetorically, Blogger isn’t able to provide us with things like protection from false claims of copyright infringement. For a blog like ours that specializes in comment and criticism of current artwork, the principle of Fair Use as provided for in the Copyright Act is what allows us, or any publication like it, to speak its mind. Fair Use of copyrighted material reflects the U.S. Constitution’s 1st Amendment right to freedom of expression. Fair Use, is a Constitutional right founded on Constitutional principles, not a legal loophole for unsavoury lowlifes to squeeze through.

Some of you reading this may think that Orbit Trap deserves to get muzzled and who cares about such academic things as the Constitution? That wouldn’t surprise me because I’ve seen such attitudes very much alive and well in the way contests and other events are run in the fractal art world. They’d like to see Orbit Trap shut down, but so far all they’ve been able to do is harass us in minor ways. Fortunately, the Constitution of the United States of America and the U.S. Copyright Act wasn’t written by people with such ethical apathy or such a narrow perspective on culture and public commentary. I don’t expect any of Orbit Trap’s critics to object to the censorship of our blog postings through bogus DMCA complaints.

What is the DMCA? Ask Cornelia Yoder. Ask her how a screenshot of the Benoit Mandelbrot Fractal Art Contest Winners page, published on the internet, intentionally or not, indexed by Google and used on Orbit Trap for the purpose of reporting on how the contest is run behind closed doors; ask her how it could be considered copyright infringement because it just happens to include a trivial 30×100 pixel thumbnail of one of her images entered in the contest?

It isn’t, of course. In fact it’s a ridiculous claim because the image represents nothing more than a navigational button in a gallery index. But that’s all you need to push the DMCA takedown notice button these days and get the entire blog posting taken offline for a month. Guilty or innocent, it makes no difference, and web hosts like Blogger are caught in the middle, forced to become instant copyright lawyers and chose between becoming part of a lawsuit themselves or to censor their own clients by removing entire blog postings without consulting the author.

I guess it’s a clear indication of how desperate our critics are to have Orbit Trap silenced that they’ve taken up such sleazy tactics as this.

So where does Orbit Trap go from here? Stay tuned. That is, change your bookmarks to OrbitTrap.ca, and stay tuned!